Cargando…
Effects of remote ischemic preconditioning in severe traumatic brain injury: A single-center randomized controlled trial
BACKGROUND: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a significant contributor to global mortality and impairment. Experimental data has shown the advantages of remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) in treating brain injury, however, there is a lack of evidence-based medicine regarding its clinical effectiv...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10519565/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37746977 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000035190 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a significant contributor to global mortality and impairment. Experimental data has shown the advantages of remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) in treating brain injury, however, there is a lack of evidence-based medicine regarding its clinical effectiveness and safety. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this study, we investigated whether RIPC could enhance outcomes in patients with severe TBI. Between January 2019 and December 2022, a comprehensive assessment was conducted on 392 individuals with severe TBI. Out of these, 304 patients were initially included and randomly assigned to receive either RIPC treatment (n = 153) or a control treatment (n = 151). The main measures of results included Glasgow Outcome Scale scores at 6 months, the occurrence of cerebral infarction during hospitalization, mortality rate within 30 days, levels of neuron-specific enolase and S-100β, any adverse effects, expenses incurred during hospitalization, and duration of hospital stay. RESULTS: The 2 groups did not show any statistically significant differences in baseline clinical data. The Glasgow Outcome Scale scores at 6 months in the RIPC group showed significant improvement when compared with the control group. Additionally, the application of RIPC therapy can reduce the concentrations of neuron-specific enolase and S-100β. There was no notable distinction observed between the 2 groups regarding the adverse reactions of RIPC-induced objective indications of tissue or neurovascular harm. In the RIPC group, there was a significant reduction in both the duration of hospital stays and the expenses associated with hospitalization. CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that RIPC has the potential to enhance clinical outcomes, mitigate nerve damage, and reduce both hospital expenses and length of stay in patients with severe TBI. The use of RIPC is a reliable and efficient method for managing severe TBI. |
---|